It is a under bold that stands with ascending J Cits are with death tax. Come-⁴.  Without Edition. American Heritage Dictionary.  Illness, dub, .  This is a word defence.  The bold needs to be above the Defination.

Poor Darlie Routier was sentenced to death over this pseudoscience.

I actually think the series "Cold Case" made a good point in how police fail now and failed in the past. I think Law & Order is more critical than you give it credit, but I think the worst in terms of police lauding is Chicago PD. I think many of the points you make are incredibly interesting and seldomly said.

did you know that john oliver did an episode about this

i'm a huge fan of the show and i recommend it to all of my friends.  but i really feel you dropped the ball with this episode.  i think you should have reached out the IP or a forensic scientist for the interview.  there are neutral forensic scientists that hate how media portrays forensic scientists.  here are a few things i think you should know.  the guest was right in the judges are the gatekeepers of what gets in and stays out of the courtroom, but over 90% of judges are former prosecutors that have used these same techniques while they were prosecutors.  PCAST said that there is some validity to fingerprinting.  the problems identified during the show do exist but not the way you presented it.  as you pointed out defense attorneys use forensic scientists, including the IP to exonerate people.  forensic science is an applied science and the application in many instances is what's bad and can't be supported scientifically.

I won't get fooled again..... 😎🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥YEEEAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!

DNA tag every bullet, Stallone Judge Dredd style.

Going completely from memory so I could be wrong: There was an episode of SVU with Ludacris where his character points out the bullshit techniques and and it's a huge blow to the department, and then they kind of forget that ever happened later.

Since the early 2000s, a spate of forensics-focused TV shows and films have emerged on the pop culture scene. Years after Law & Order premiered in the '90s, shows like CSI, NCIS, and The Mentalist followed, trumpeting the scientific merit of analyzing blood-spatter patterns, reading facial and bodily cues, and using the latest fingerprint-matching technology to catch the bad guy.

Yet what these procedurals neglect to acknowledge is that many of these popular forensic techniques are deeply unscientific and entirely political. Spatter pattern-matching, firearms analysis, hair analysis, fingerprint and bite mark analysis — they’re all mostly bullshit with little scientific merit. Despite this, forensics have helped contribute to the wrongful convictions of thousands of people: a storytelling aid, prosecutorial smoke and mirrors, a courtroom PR tool to lend scientific verisimilitude to what is very often just circumstantial, hunch-based police work.

On this episode, we break down how popular culture depictions of forensics helps mislead viewers — and by extension jurors — into thinking forensics are science that proves guilt rather than what they really are: slick marketing collateral to help prosecutors convict someone they already think is guilty for other, nonscientific reasons. 

We are joined by Aviva Shen, Senior Editor at Slate.

Episode 94: The Goofy Pseudoscience Copaganda of TV Forensics

Citations Needed is a podcast about the media, power, PR, and the history of bullshit. It is hosted by Nima Shirazi and Adam Johnson, and produced by Florence Barrau-Adams.

Comments

calicia

Jake Waltier

yamartis

yamartis

Anonymous KnowBody

Jones Tigo

Doug Welch

Jakob Wasserhövel

user412031026

For Tits